Economist-Lawyer: Aba Standards Teaching Collaboration

The American Bar Association (ABA) has strict standards for law students, including the development of personal conscience and independent professional judgment. Economics, on the other hand, is a field that explores human action in a world of scarcity, where resources must be weighed and allocated efficiently. Abba Lerner, a Russian-born economist, contributed significantly to this field with his theories on inflation, unemployment, and international trade. With his clear thinking and writing, Lerner made complex economic concepts accessible, even if his ideas were often attributed to Keynes. So, can an economist teach law with ABA standards in mind? The answer may lie in the ability to translate complex ideas into understandable language and explore the ethical implications of economic decisions, ensuring that law students can grasp the impact of their legal choices on society and individuals.

The role of the American Bar Association (ABA) in law school accreditation

The American Bar Association (ABA) plays a significant role in law school accreditation in the United States. The ABA's Council of the Section on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar is recognised by the United States Department of Education as the official accrediting agency for law schools in the country. This means that the ABA is responsible for evaluating and approving law schools to ensure they meet specific standards of education and training.

The ABA has a comprehensive set of standards that law schools must adhere to in order to receive and maintain their accreditation status. These standards cover various aspects of legal education, including learning outcomes, faculty qualifications, admissions requirements, and post-graduate employment data. ABA-accredited law schools are subject to regular monitoring and comprehensive reviews every ten years to ensure they remain in compliance with these standards.

One of the critical roles of the ABA is to ensure that law schools provide a uniform educational experience for their students. To achieve this, the ABA has implemented revisions to its standards, such as Standard 303, which focuses on the formation of a lawyer's professional identity and includes requirements for law schools to provide education on bias, cross-cultural competency, equal access, and the elimination of racism and discrimination. The ABA also revised standards related to learning outcomes, shifting the focus from "abilities" to "knowledge, skills, or competencies."

Additionally, the ABA has addressed concerns about the accuracy of post-graduate employment statistics by requiring law schools to disclose more detailed information about their graduates' employment outcomes and bar passage rates. The ABA has also updated its accreditation process to include penalties for schools that misrepresent their graduates' employment data.

The ABA's accreditation standards have sparked some controversy, with critics arguing that they may limit faculty autonomy and stifle innovation in teaching and contribute to rising tuition costs. However, the ABA's goal is to ensure that law schools provide a high-quality legal education that adequately prepares graduates for the bar exam and legal practice. ABA accreditation is essential for law schools as it affects their recognition and a graduate's ability to practice law in different states.

The impact of ABA standards on law school curricula

The American Bar Association (ABA) is tasked with accrediting law schools in the US. The ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools are regularly monitored, and comprehensive reviews are conducted every tenth year. The ABA does not rank or rate law schools but provides a statement of the accreditation status of a school.

The ABA's new student learning outcomes standards, approved by the ABA's House of Delegates in February 2024, will phase in starting in 2026. The new standards will require law schools to set "minimum learning outcomes" for every class they offer and ensure those outcomes are the same across all sections of required courses. This will make law school courses more uniform and consistent.

Outside of "extraordinary circumstances," the new standards also require that 80% of each first-year law student’s teachers must be full-time faculty members, rather than adjunct instructors. This ensures that new students receive a more standardized education and that law schools are held to their obligations.

The ABA Standards also address the formation of a lawyer's professional identity. Interpretation 303-5 requires frequent opportunities for students to reflect on professional identity during each year of law school and in a variety of courses and co-curricular and professional development opportunities. The Standards emphasize the values and responsibilities of the legal profession, including cross-cultural competency, equal access, and the elimination of bias, discrimination, and racism.

While some legal academics welcomed the greater oversight imposed by the revised standards, others argued that the changes limit the flexibility and control of law professors over their class content. The impact of the new ABA Standards on law school curricula remains to be seen, but they are expected to have significant implications and will likely lead to curricular adaptations.

The benefits of ABA standards for law students

The American Bar Association (ABA) has implemented several standards and requirements for law schools to meet. While some critics argue that these standards amount to micromanaging and limit the flexibility of law professors, others welcome the greater oversight. Here are some benefits of ABA standards for law students:

Consistency in Legal Education

The ABA's revised standards aim to create uniformity in law school courses. Law schools are now required to set "minimum learning outcomes" for each class, ensuring consistency across all sections of required courses. This consistency helps students understand how individual classes fit into the larger curriculum and ensures they receive a comprehensive education, regardless of the school they attend.

Improved Curriculum and Student Growth

The ABA standards encourage law schools to develop more effective curricula that foster each student's growth toward a full range of capacities and skills relevant to legal practice. This includes not only legal knowledge but also professional skills such as interviewing, counseling, negotiation, conflict resolution, and cultural competency.

Early Assessment and Feedback

The new standards mandate that all first-year classes include an early assessment to provide students with feedback on their performance before their final exams. This allows students to identify areas of improvement and make necessary adjustments to their learning strategies.

Faculty Composition

The ABA standards require that, outside of extraordinary circumstances, 80% of each first-year law student's teachers must be full-time faculty members. This ensures that new students primarily learn from dedicated instructors who are fully integrated into the academic community, potentially enhancing the quality and consistency of their education.

Addressing Bias and Discrimination

Standard 303(c) addresses the values and responsibilities of the legal profession, requiring law schools to provide training and education to students on bias, cross-cultural competency, equal access, and the elimination of racism. This aspect of the standards ensures that law students are introduced to the importance of creating a justice system that provides equal access and eliminates discrimination.

Overall, the ABA standards aim to improve the quality and consistency of legal education, benefiting law students by providing them with a well-rounded and comprehensive foundation for their future careers.

The potential limitations of ABA standards on faculty autonomy

The American Bar Association's (ABA) Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has proposed a series of changes to law school accreditation standards. These changes aim to ensure consistency across all sections of required courses by adopting uniform learning outcomes. While the ABA claims that these changes will benefit students, law schools, and the profession, some legal academics have raised concerns about their potential impact on faculty autonomy.

One of the main concerns is that the revised standards could limit the flexibility and control that law professors have over their class content. The new standards require law schools to set "minimum learning outcomes" for every class, ensuring that these outcomes are consistent across all sections of required courses. This mandate for consistency may restrict faculty autonomy in course design and could potentially stifle innovation in teaching.

Additionally, there are worries about the lack of guidance on who will determine these uniform outcomes. The ABA's revisions include specific rules for faculty contracts, ensuring that all full-time faculty are informed about their duties and benefits. However, law school deans have expressed strong opposition to the proposed changes, arguing that they could harm legal education by reducing flexibility in hiring full-time faculty and potentially leading to a reliance on part-time or adjunct staff.

The ABA's response to these concerns has been that the changes are necessary to give the requirements "teeth," suggesting that some schools view the current requirements as mere "busy work." The ABA also emphasizes that the revisions aim to protect faculty members, ensuring that they can engage in teaching and decision-making without fearing for their job security. Nevertheless, critics argue that the ABA's primary motive is to exert greater regulatory control over law schools, which could ultimately hinder rather than enhance the quality of legal education.

The process of ABA accreditation for law schools

The process of earning ABA accreditation signifies that a law school meets the standards set by the American Bar Association. ABA accreditation is widely regarded as a prestigious distinction for law schools, and it serves as a key factor in determining the career prospects of law graduates.

ABA-accredited law schools are recognised for providing a superior legal education, often featuring highly qualified full-time professors and well-resourced facilities. Consequently, many law firms exclusively hire graduates from ABA-accredited institutions, and these graduates often secure higher starting salaries.

In contrast, non-ABA-accredited schools have been criticised for offering a less comprehensive legal education, with part-time professors and limited resources. However, there are exceptions to this perception, particularly in California, where some CBA-approved schools are held in similar esteem as their ABA-accredited counterparts.

For students who aspire to practice law in California and may have less competitive GPAs and LSAT scores, attending a CBA-accredited school can be a strategic choice. This decision, however, may have implications for their future career options outside of California, as CBA-approved schools are generally viewed with less respect in other states.

Frequently asked questions